Ross v. Tomlab Optimization AB

Filing 56

SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER extending time for defendants to file answer/counterclaims to 1/13/2009; Signed by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel on 12/9/2008. (awb, COURT-STAFF) (Filed on 12/10/2008)

Download PDF
David E. Newhouse, Esq. State Bar No. 54217 NEWHOUSE & ASSOCIATES Tel. No. (650) 348-8652 Twin Oaks Office Plaza Fax. No. (650) 348-8655 477 Ninth Avenue Ste 112 Email: San Mateo, Ca. 94402-1858 Attorney for Defendant TOMLAB OPTIMIZATION, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA I. MICHAEL ROSS, an individual Plaintiff v. TOMLAB OPTIMIZATION AB, TOMLAB OPTIMIZATION, INC., ANIL RAO, Defendants For Court Use Only CASE. NO. C08-cv-01052 MHP SECOND STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME TO ANSWER AND COUNTER CLAIM [Local Rule 6] 1 2 3 4 5 Plaintiff I. MICHAEL ROSS and Defendant TOMLAB OPTIMIZATION AB by and through their respective attorneys, Stuart C. Clark, Esq. and David E. Newhouse, Esq. stipulate and agree as follows: 1. Time for Defendant TOMLAB OPTIMIZATION AB to serve an answer with possible counter claims is extended THIRTY (30) days from December 13, 2008 to January 13, 2008. Dated: December 8 , 2008 ____________________________________ Stuart C. Clark, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff I. MICHAEL ROSS 6 Dated: December 5, 2008R IST UNIT ED S SD TE TA ICT C RT U O R NIA David E. Newhouse O ORD IT IS S UNIT ED ERED ____________________________________ David E. Newhouse, Esq. Attorney for Defendant TOMLAB OPTIMIZATION AB Digitally signed by David E. Newhouse DN: cn=David E. Newhouse, o=Newhouse & Associates, ou,, c=US Date: 2008.12.05 18:04:58 -08'00' S S DISTRICT TE C TA ER N F D IS T IC T O R A C LI FO Judge Marilyn H. Patel R NIA IT IS SO ORDERED RT U O R NEWHOUSE & ASSOCIATES F D I S Mateo, CA O 477 Ninth Ave. 112 San T R I C T 94402-1858 Tel: 650-348-8652 Fax: 650-348-8655 email: E N C STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME TO ANSWER AND COUNTER CLAIM A LI FO arilyn Judge M NO RT H l H. Pate NO RT H Page1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?